This whole "boss killer" and "ranged damage" jazz is mollycoddling. So, was throwing "the deal" out the window in the first place. Instead of having the stones to say, "Look, you're not specialists. Expecting to take the damage of a Tanker and dish out the damage of a Blaster, two ATs that are specialists, is asking too much." and hold Scrappers to "the deal" they're damn sure holding Blasters to, they started mollycoddling. And unfortunately, once you start doing that, you have to keep doing it, and unfortunately, once you start doing that, it snowballs.
Now, do I think the devs will ever straighten this out? Not really. But this "Blasters are ranged damage" and the rest of the things that get floated around here are bull[censored] and need to be pointed out as such. Blasters are about dishing out damage. Period. The range from which that damage is dished out matters not at all. Blasters cannot withstand damage. Not to mention status effects. If they're expected to be held to "the deal" they damn sure better get what they paid for.
[ QUOTE ]
That didn't work out, so the devs say he is the "ranged damage" dealer class. But unlike Scrappers, Blasters have received almost no changes since this role was announced, and neither of those changes directly improved blaster performance in that role. Further, the secondaries (or at least most of them) have been acknowledged as lackluster without being fixed.
[/ QUOTE ] (changed "do" to "so in the second sentence)
This sums thing up very nicely in my opinion. I believe that the developers actually think that blasters do serve their role as ranged damage dealers and haven't twigged on the fact that they don't in game play.
[ QUOTE ]
Am i the only one that read STates comments that its scrapper testing that is going on. Seems funny to me that in order to fix the blaster sets they are testing scrappers, chances are blasters are not going to get a damn thing, its scrappers that will be buffed or nerfed accordingly to make blasters feel better about themselves. So again, blasters will get nothing accept a more favorable personal glow when making comparisons to another AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
Look at the date on the OP. This is a serious necropost, said adjustments already happened. Nothing for scrappers to be concerned with.
[ QUOTE ]
But this "Blasters are ranged damage" and the rest of the things that get floated around here are bull[censored] and need to be pointed out as such. Blasters are about dishing out damage. Period. The range from which that damage is dished out matters not at all. Blasters cannot withstand damage. Not to mention status effects. If they're expected to be held to "the deal" they damn sure better get what they paid for.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think the "ranged damge" role is BS.
Range matters. It's not quite a defense, but it's not meaningless either. And it's not BS for there to be an AT whose primary role is ranged damage.
Generally speaking, the MOBs dish out more damage per attack at melee, they generally dish out more DPS at melee, they generally dish out more status effects at melee. Combat at melee is faster in animation and recharge time, which lessens the opportunities for the Blaster and his teammates to react to a situation gone bad (status, tanker/controller/defender down, etc.) before it results in a domino death for the canary-in-the-mine Blaster. And the cost of switching targets for a ranged offender are much lower than for a melee-er.
The problem with Blaster's isn't that the devs have revisioned them into a role that's BS. The problem is that they do not "hold Scrappers to "the deal" they're damn sure holding Blasters to". They aren't holding Controllers to it anymore either. Nor Corruptors, Masterminds, Stalkers nor Brutes.
The only ATs still being held to the old deal are Defenders, Blasters, Tankers and Dominators. They each need buffs to better fulfill their roles in the game.
The only BS I see here is that Blasters haven't been given the tools to fulfill the role they have been given as well as most other ATs fulfill their roles.
(PS - That's not to say that Scrappers, Controllers, Corruptors, Masterminds, Stalkers and Brutes are right where they should be and shouldn't have their capabilities trimmed a bit. But trimming their capabilities isn't going to make a Blaster any more fun to play (unless you PVP exclusively). The MOBs will be handing you your behind just as much as they did before.)
Range is pretty much meaningless given Blaster animation times. In the time it takes to fire off an attack or two for most sets, thats more than enough time for an enemy to close to melee and smack you with their high damage attack. Nearly every enemy mezz is ranged, so blasters being at range is no defense there. I dont buy the arguement that mez is significantly more likely in melee than at range. Other than Malta hand tazers and the occasional incidental stun from a Crey riot baton, I'm having a hard time thinking of any mob mezes that are only used in melee ranged.
As well, with many of the best blaster primary attacks having ranges that are very short(blaze, powerburst, shout, flamethrower) , it makes it even easier for mobs to close to melee and smack you.
To say nothing of the insane range some mobs get on their attacks. A typical malta minion using Burst can outrange my AR blaster's Snipe. I didnt believe it until I tested it. Council Rifleman can do the same.
Heroes
Dysmal
Lumynous
Sam Steele
Pluck
Wile
Slagheap
Pressure Wave
Rhiannon Bel
Verified
Stellaric
Syd Mallorn
Villains
Jotunheim Skald
Saer Maen
Jen Corbae
Illuminance
Venator Arawn
Taiga Dryad
Tarranos
[ QUOTE ]
...a blaster is A) Not a melee AT; they are *defined* (Repeatedly) as a Ranged AT; and B) because they lack the survivability to live in melee without some pretty choice pool spending.
...and to make it worse, a blaster can't even stay AT range; because many of their moves require them to get close.
[/ QUOTE ]
Allow me to disagree slightly. Blasters are NOT ranged characters. They are High Damage/Low Defense. People who play blasters can choose to play close range, medium range, long range, extreme range, indirect or a combination of some of the above. I have all five types and use each depending on targets. Give me a good bubbler and I'm gold. Tankers and Scrapper who tell be to get back once the scrum has started...well, let's just say I won't leave them anything to play with. My job is to do as much damage as I can as fast as possible even at the risk of my health. A good blaster brings the right tool for the job. Ranged or hand-to-hand. Be flexible.
[ QUOTE ]
Range is pretty much meaningless given Blaster animation times. In the time it takes to fire off an attack or two for most sets, thats more than enough time for an enemy to close to melee and smack you with their high damage attack.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, an enemy can close in the time it takes you to launch a couple of attacks. In a couple of attacks, you can often kill an opponent or at least lay down a soft control like immobilize, stun or knock. If they do close to melee range, you almost definitely have a melee ranged control and some intense melee damage to do unto them before they do unto you. 1-2 attacks while they run and take it in the crotch is far from meaningless.
Now, if you fail to pull and bring a bunch of guys onto you, you're in trouble. This is one place where most of the secondaries demonstrate their lack of utility. If it's one hero = 3 minions, Blasters need a way to deal with three incoming foes at once, and with the tools in their arsenal, they aren't well equipped. That's not a fault of range, that's a fault of secondaries that don't support range well enough. Something as simple as a cone or drop with a slow, brief but high -ACC, or a ~50% chance of sleep or fear or immobilize would resolve that situation quite readily without stepping on other AT's toes, as caltrops readily demonstrates
The problem you cite here isn't that range is meaningless, but that most Blasters lack the tools to keep foes at range well enough when solo.
Meanwhile, on a team, Blasters synergize fabulously with a controller or tanker who can keep MOBs still wholesale for you while you let loose with the damage. The only hole I see, and it's one that needs filling, is that some secondaries lack a good "oh crap" power to use when you manage to grab aggro despite the help of those kinds of teammates. If, for example, Blasters had placate in their secondaries, you'd find a lot fewer faceplants arising for them on teams.
[ QUOTE ]
Nearly every enemy mezz is ranged so blasters being at range is no defense there. I dont buy the arguement that mez is significantly more likely in melee than at range. Other than Malta hand tazers and the occasional incidental stun from a Crey riot baton, I'm having a hard time thinking of any mob mezes that are only used in melee ranged.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nearly every faction has ranged mezzers, which are a bane on the squishies ESPECIALLY Blasters, and that may well be what you recall. But at melee range, control is a pretty common, stacking, strong secondary effect on many MOB powers not including the lovely control primary melee powers you mention.
[ QUOTE ]
As well, with many of the best blaster primary attacks having ranges that are very short(blaze, powerburst, shout, flamethrower) , it makes it even easier for mobs to close to melee and smack you.
To say nothing of the insane range some mobs get on their attacks. A typical malta minion using Burst can outrange my AR blaster's Snipe. I didnt believe it until I tested it. Council Rifleman can do the same.
[/ QUOTE ]
These are exactly the sorts of places where I think they owe Blasters buffs to fulfill their role.
[ QUOTE ]
Range matters. It's not quite a defense, but it's not meaningless either. And it's not BS for there to be an AT whose primary role is ranged damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not saying range is BS, per se. What I'm saying is this whole "Blasters are ranged damage" is pandering to Scrappers so they won't boohoo because Blasters can and/or should be outdamaging them using melee attacks. Blasters aren't "Rangers", they're damage dealers. Period. Doesn't matter at what range that damage is dished out and I don't want to see the AT getting overhauled into Rangers because Scrappers can't tolerate the fact that a "squishie" can out punch them.
If there is one thing wrong with blasters that I am sure we as players can agree on, is that we can not agree on what is wrong with blasters.
We were told that our role was ranged damage, and in fact when it comes to ranged damage, we are by and far, better at it than any other AT.
Then we get into the "so what" mode of thinking. That is where the problem lies my friends. It is not that there is a specific problem that can be quantified and laid out on the table, it is that we were given a role that is mediocre at best, and downright uneeded at worst.
And that is the thing. When you design a game that is based almost entirely upon melee combat (there are powersets without ranged, but there are no powersets without melee) then anything that is too good at Ranged combat is too powerful.
This is the reason that they are making us keep the Melee powers in the secondary. NOT because they want to kill us, but because they can not in good conscience allow us to actually excell at the one place they say is our role.
It would break the game if they did. That is the long and short of it, my fellow blasters. If they gave us what we think we need, more specifically what we want, then it would break their game. I mean come on. Can you imagine the outcry that would come from the Scrappers if we could 1 shot Lts, or heaven forbid, even Bosses.
Not saying of course that any change in our base damage would result in either happening (but wouldn't it be nice....oh well, a blaster can dream can't he), but that is the direction things would head if we kept a war up between Scrappers and Blasters.
Now, I am sure that we will never agree on this, but I have some real ideas as to how we could actually improve blasters, and make them more viable as an At across the board. Just so that any devs who might still be trolling know, I will play Blasters no matter what happens to them. I would just like to see some of these changes.
Leave the base damage the same. It may not be perfect, but I think we can live with it.
Primary sets. Increase the range across the board. I want to be hitting from real range. Ok, this is mainly a wish list item, as I can not see this happening anytime soon.
Secondary sets. Revamp the sets please. A complete testing cycle devoted to the secondaries, and ONLY the secondaries would be appreciated. Not only does the end game need to be considered (IE level 38 and above when all powers are available) but the mid and low game, and the effect that these powers have upon it. I say keep the melee as it currently is, and I will say why in a moment. Just make sure that each set is "oercieved" as viable. I know the numbers say they are right now, but a little tweeking of animation times would likely be enough to help us out in the long run.
Inherent ability: I have only ever found it useful once or twice to actually prevent dying, and yes that is both in the low game and high game. I think our inherent as it stands NEEDS to be changed. We have the second most useless inherent in the game. Only the defenders got a shorter stick than we did. I propose one of a couple of changes (which I KNOW will not happen, but again, I can dream can't I)
1) Make defiance activate sooner. A blaster has no defense powers, and as such is going to take a lot of damage and always be in trouble of dying. Solo, I am often at just above 50% health for long stretches at a time. I would like to se AT LEAST 25% of my defiance bar full at 50% health. Sure, keep it so that it does not completely fill til the same point. Just make it start filling sooner.
2) Change the inherent completely (in two flavors):
a) If our role is ranged damage, then give us an inherent that reflects this. Personally I suggest an inherent called Point Blank. The concept being that as we get closer to our enemies, our accuracy, as well as our damage increases. Melee powers are not affected. Other powers are affected as a percentage of their base range. Range boost enhancements do not adjust this at all, and shots outside of the base range are completely unaffected by the inherent. A shot from melee range would get the maximum boost to damage and accuracy (probably a 100% boost to base damage, and similar accuracy boost). This is to reflect that we are in MUCH more danger at that range. We could have the HPs of a fully buffed tank, and we would STILL die impossibly fast at that range.
b) Give us a power similar to the dominator, but with a much different purpose. As we take damage, the bar would fill. A strike taking us to 1 hp (basically 99% damage) would be enough to fill the bar from 0 to say 30%. If there is ANY ammount in the bar, then our ability is available to be used. The refresh timer on this ability could be 8 ot even 10 minutes. When we use the ability, we die dealing damage to all mobs in a good size area. We still take debt, but hey, if we are going to die ANYWAY why can't we take some of the enemies with us. Damage would be a percentage of the health of an even level boss. Loss of this bar would occur at a rate equal to that of the domination bar.
Now, before everyone starts flaming me, stop for a moment and think. Here we are. We are the LEAST unified community in CoH. Every single one of us has a different concept of what should be done to "fix" blasters. What I have proposed is just what I think will make the most number of us happy.
Sure, this might not be the case, but at least read and think about it before you tear it to pieces.
What is the meaning of life?
To gain more experience/money/magic/runes/red pages/blue pages/coins/gold/whatever?
No!
It is to have fun!
[ QUOTE ]
We were told that our role was ranged damage...
[/ QUOTE ]
Wrong. We are being told that our role is ranged damage. What we were told was dealing damage. And that's what the AT is. Damage Dealers. We can't take much in the way of a punch but boy can we dish it out. At least, in theory.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Range matters. It's not quite a defense, but it's not meaningless either. And it's not BS for there to be an AT whose primary role is ranged damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not saying range is BS, per se. What I'm saying is this whole "Blasters are ranged damage" is pandering to Scrappers so they won't boohoo because Blasters can and/or should be outdamaging them using melee attacks.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh. Well, then. Ummm. I guess we agree.
[ QUOTE ]
Blasters aren't "Rangers", they're damage dealers. Period. Doesn't matter at what range that damage is dished out and I don't want to see the AT getting overhauled into Rangers because Scrappers can't tolerate the fact that a "squishie" can out punch them.
[/ QUOTE ]
I totally agree here. If Blaters lost their ability to greatly magnify their damage output by closing to melee, it would be a serious error. Blasters aren't ONLY about ranged damage, anymore than tankers are ONLY supposed to be about armor or controllers ONLY about control. Ranged damge is just thier forte.
I wouldn't mind seeing a little bit more range in the secondaries, but if they eliminated blapping, that'd be a complete misstep IMO.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We were told that our role was ranged damage...
[/ QUOTE ]
Wrong. We are being told that our role is ranged damage. What we were told was dealing damage. And that's what the AT is. Damage Dealers. We can't take much in the way of a punch but boy can we dish it out. At least, in theory.
[/ QUOTE ]
"The deal," as Pilcrow puts it, is indeed that every AT should sacrifice damage for protection (whether that's holds or direct defenses), or sacrifice protection for damage. Blasters do damage with almost no defense available. Tankers do defense with fairly low damage. Why, then, do so many of the other archetypes break the mold?
If ranked on a scale of 1-5, the ATs appear to break down like this (note: opinion based on observation approaching; offense consists of ability to do damage, defense consists of ability to avoid death by heals, debuffs, defense, resistance, pets, or some combination):
City of Whatever Archetype (Offense/Defense)
Blaster (5/1)
Brute (4/3)
Controller (3/4)
Corruptor (5/2)
Defender (3/3)
Dominator (4/1)
Kheldian (depends/also depends)
Mastermind (3/3)
Scrapper (4/3)
Stalker (4/2)
Tanker (2/5)
I realize this is simplistic and heavily slanted by virtue of my observations and personal experience, but it appears to me that some archetypes are simply better than others. That's a concern for PvP but it's also a concern for PvE in that some archetypes will breeze through missions that stop others dead in their tracks.
Also of some concern, within archetypes there are "gamebreakers" like the Dark/Dark/Dark defenders used to be, or the Fire/Radiation Emission/Fire controllers, or any number of other "Flavor of the Month" builds. If the dev team can get each archetype to perform consistently no matter what powerset is taken, then they'll have a better chance of balancing between archetypes.
Gotta love it. Why do you think we will never actually get some lovin'? I mean. Here I post a tome, and all I get is a response to a single line.
What is the meaning of life?
To gain more experience/money/magic/runes/red pages/blue pages/coins/gold/whatever?
No!
It is to have fun!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We were told that our role was ranged damage...
[/ QUOTE ]
Wrong. We are being told that our role is ranged damage. What we were told was dealing damage. And that's what the AT is. Damage Dealers. We can't take much in the way of a punch but boy can we dish it out. At least, in theory.
[/ QUOTE ]States started this thread off saying that we were Ranged Damage as our role. This thread has been around for about a year. 1 year applies in my mind as a WERE more than an ARE. Now I agree that this is semantics, but heck, your entire objection to what I said is based upon semantics.
What is the meaning of life?
To gain more experience/money/magic/runes/red pages/blue pages/coins/gold/whatever?
No!
It is to have fun!
[ QUOTE ]
If there is one thing wrong with blasters that I am sure we as players can agree on, is that we can not agree on what is wrong with blasters.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's why it's important to get some guidance from the rednames about what is and is not their vision for the AT. If the devs tell us that ranged damage is our forte, then solutions that focus on that are more likely to be accepted and implemented than if we say: "I think we should be more like corruptors". It may be a nice thing to believe, but it ain't the vision.
[ QUOTE ]
We were told that our role was ranged damage, and in fact when it comes to ranged damage, we are by and far, better at it than any other AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know that is always the case. In a solo situation, the lower ranged damage of a Defender or Controller can be better than ours, because they can actually go to town with it, while we pull and kill n run n kill n run? In a team situation...well, there's a reason they raised our HPs.
We're clearly the best at it on a team that is able to support our doing it, but controllers don't need to be on an ideal team to be the best at control, nor defenders to be the best at buffing, nor tankers to be the best at managing aggro.
[ QUOTE ]
Then we get into the "so what" mode of thinking. That is where the problem lies my friends. It is not that there is a specific problem that can be quantified and laid out on the table, it is that we were given a role that is mediocre at best, and downright uneeded at worst.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would disagree. Our role isn't mediocre, we simply don't excel at it in noticeable qualitative ways. If Snipes and Nukes were in our secondaries, and defender sets had buffs/debuffs in those slots instead, I don't think our role would be considered at all mediocre. What we lack is capabilities in our secondaries that are both unique to blasters and fulfilling of our primary role: ranged damage. Toss a couple of unique ranged attacks in there (like target-focused AE damage auras, like an EF that does damage) and Blater's role would hardly be considered mediocre.
[ QUOTE ]
This is the reason that they are making us keep the Melee powers in the secondary. NOT because they want to kill us, but because they can not in good conscience allow us to actually excell at the one place they say is our role.
[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree. I think they put them there originally because they had a different vesion of the AT back then. Now, with a new vision and admittedly lackluster secondaries, they finally CAN do what you say they cannot. Maybe I'm wrong, but we had an ecouraging post from Castle on that score.
[ QUOTE ]
It would break the game if they did. That is the long and short of it, my fellow blasters. If they gave us what we think we need, more specifically what we want, then it would break their game. I mean come on. Can you imagine the outcry that would come from the Scrappers if we could 1 shot Lts, or heaven forbid, even Bosses.
[/ QUOTE ]
You don't need to be able to one-shot LTs and Bosses to have a good role. Everyone would and SHOULD outcry if that happens.
Nevertheless, the outcry of Scrappers is irrelevant, they already got their lackluster sets fixed and their team role buffs. They'll have to cope with other ATs getting the same things.
[ QUOTE ]
Primary sets. Increase the range across the board. I want to be hitting from real range. Ok, this is mainly a wish list item, as I can not see this happening anytime soon.
[/ QUOTE ]
/agree
[ QUOTE ]
Secondary sets. Revamp the sets please.
[/ QUOTE ]
/agree
[ QUOTE ]
Inherent ability: Point Blank. The concept being that as we get closer to our enemies, our accuracy, as well as our damage increases. Melee powers are not affected. Other powers are affected as a percentage of their base range. Range boost enhancements do not adjust this at all, and shots outside of the base range are completely unaffected by the inherent. A shot from melee range would get the maximum boost to damage and accuracy (probably a 100% boost to base damage, and similar accuracy boost). This is to reflect that we are in MUCH more danger at that range.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've always liked this concept, but how 'bout this?
Migrate the PVP inherent (irresistable damage) to PVE
[ QUOTE ]
Now, before everyone starts flaming me, stop for a moment and think. Here we are. We are the LEAST unified community in CoH.
[/ QUOTE ]
Spend some time in the Defender forum. Try asking them how THEY want to be fixed. 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Inherent ability: Point Blank. The concept being that as we get closer to our enemies, our accuracy, as well as our damage increases. Melee powers are not affected. Other powers are affected as a percentage of their base range. Range boost enhancements do not adjust this at all, and shots outside of the base range are completely unaffected by the inherent. A shot from melee range would get the maximum boost to damage and accuracy (probably a 100% boost to base damage, and similar accuracy boost). This is to reflect that we are in MUCH more danger at that range.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've always liked this concept, but how 'bout this?
Migrate the PVP inherent (irresistable damage) to PVE
[/ QUOTE ] That is something that I could agree to as well. Would make a nice change to how we fare against those pesky foes with resistances to damages (say ALL of them)
What is the meaning of life?
To gain more experience/money/magic/runes/red pages/blue pages/coins/gold/whatever?
No!
It is to have fun!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Inherent ability: Point Blank. The concept being that as we get closer to our enemies, our accuracy, as well as our damage increases. Melee powers are not affected. Other powers are affected as a percentage of their base range. Range boost enhancements do not adjust this at all, and shots outside of the base range are completely unaffected by the inherent. A shot from melee range would get the maximum boost to damage and accuracy (probably a 100% boost to base damage, and similar accuracy boost). This is to reflect that we are in MUCH more danger at that range.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've always liked this concept, but how 'bout this?
Migrate the PVP inherent (irresistable damage) to PVE
[/ QUOTE ] That is something that I could agree to as well. Would make a nice change to how we fare against those pesky foes with resistances to damages (say ALL of them)
[/ QUOTE ]
It wouldn't even need to be a linear boost. Use a similar scale as defiance (for that matter, use defiance, just attach it to range instead of health), and lower the boost to a peak of 100% or even 50%. I'd trade defiance for a 50% boost at melee ranges.
I've never yet taken a hit from a bad guy skidding across the floor on his keister.
~~~__O
~~~_/
~~/ /
Learn the knockback, live the knockback, love the knockback!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We were told that our role was ranged damage...
[/ QUOTE ]
Wrong. We are being told that our role is ranged damage. What we were told was dealing damage. And that's what the AT is. Damage Dealers. We can't take much in the way of a punch but boy can we dish it out. At least, in theory.
[/ QUOTE ]States started this thread off saying that we were Ranged Damage as our role. This thread has been around for about a year. 1 year applies in my mind as a WERE more than an ARE. Now I agree that this is semantics, but heck, your entire objection to what I said is based upon semantics.
[/ QUOTE ]
It isn't semantics. It's experiance. I've been here since before there was a here here (this makes sense to folks that know this wasn't the original home of the CoH forums)I was here before CoH even had archetypes. When the Blaster AT was first broke it was about damage. This whole "ranged" jazz is there for one reason and one reason only... to placate Scrappers concerned about their roll. And that is a recent phenomena... relatively speaking. My objection isn't to what you've said. I'm simply correcting the conditioning you've been subject to.
I may not have been in beta before ATs...but I was in beta.
The only conditioning I have been through is that of way too much experience of my own with the morphing of the AT.
Sure, my reg date is recent, but that is only because I had my forum account deleted 4 times for no apparent reason (the Customer Service department said that I was imagining things)
What is the meaning of life?
To gain more experience/money/magic/runes/red pages/blue pages/coins/gold/whatever?
No!
It is to have fun!
[ QUOTE ]
I may not have been in beta before ATs...but I was in beta.
[/ QUOTE ]
ATs were always there in beta. I'm not talking about beta.
He's talking about the pre-beta boards, a place full of boundless optimism. 
Bottom line though, if the devs are gonna go with this (relatively) new role of "ranged damage dealers" for us, they *have* to fix the primary powersets to make that a viable and needed playstyle, and revamp the secondaries to actually support that.
edit- Note that I am not advocating the elimination of blapping
Furio--Lvl 50+3 Fire/Fire/Fire Blaster, Virtue
Megadeth--Lvl 50+3 Necro/DM/Soul MM, Virtue
Veriandros--Lvl 50+3 Crab Soldier, Virtue
"So come and get me! I'll be waiting for ye, with a whiff of the old brimstone. I'm a grim bloody fable, with an unhappy bloody end!" Demoman, TF2
[ QUOTE ]
Nice try. Unfortunately those of us who've been around awhile know better. Sustainable Damage > Burst Damage. Do Scrappers have nukes? No. Do they need them? Not when they have a defensive capacity a helluva lot stronger than anything Blasters have, coupled with an offensive capacity that shouldn't even be anywhere near that of a Blaster... but is Hell, Scrappers had an offensive capacity that capped out at 500% while Blasters were, until very recently, capped at 400%.
Don't even get me started on the Scrapper inherent that spikes their damage yet does not require them to first get their [censored]es kicked in order for it to kick in.
Long and short of it is this. Blasters paid for their offensive capacity by giving up their defensive capacity. Scrappers didn't pay for a damned thing. Not only should their offensive capacity not surpass that of Blasters. It shouldn't even come close. Period.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oops, sorry I'm late on this:
Have you played a scrapper? I mean recently, not I3 regen. Survivability is a joke. Better than blasters? Of course! By a larger margin than blasters can outdamage scrappers? Of course not! They're pretty well balanced, scrappers having an edge solo, and blasters having the edge on teams. Now, can some scrappers do more than some blasters? Of course! Comparing a Dark Melee/Dark Armor to an energy/fire is just silly. How about we compare claws/inv to fire/ice instead
As for defiance Vs critical hits... I'll trade any day. Criticals are an average of 8% of the time, and often come on a low damage attack. It's the lottery, whereas defiance is your tax rebate. If you win the lottery, you get a LOT of money! But, chances are against it. Your tax rebate sucks, but it's there.
[ QUOTE ]
Have you played a scrapper? I mean recently, not I3 regen.
[/ QUOTE ]
No. Scrappers never held much interest for me. Entirely too safe. I've tried several builds and power combos, but just could never get into it.
[ QUOTE ]
Survivability is a joke.
[/ QUOTE ]
You want to talk about a joke? Ride into battle wearing nothing but a thin layer of gasoline-soaked tissuepaper for protection. I blapp, baby. Until lvl 44, I didn't have a single means of dealing with incomming damage save for my trusty gizmo (Aid Self) and even with Charged Armor, I'm still susceptible to getting the crap mezz'd out of me. The next time I see a Scrapper drunk-walking, or held, or slept, or immob'd instead of having all of it run off their backs like water off a duck you'll have a point. Until then you are seriously barking up the wrong friggin' tree.
[ QUOTE ]
Better than blasters? Of course! By a larger margin than blasters can outdamage scrappers? Of course not!
[/ QUOTE ]
Therein lies the problem. Scrappers have a defensive capacity. Blaster paid for their offensive capacity by giving up virtually all of their defensive capacity. Scrappers should in no way even come close to Blaster damage output. Blasters should dish out damage as obviously better than any AT as they obviously cannot take it. Sliding scale. The more you dish it out, the less you can take it. The more you can take it, the less you can dish it out. That's "the deal". Unfortunately, while Blasters are expected to hold to "the deal" Scrappers have been violating it since about I2.
[ QUOTE ]
They're pretty well balanced, scrappers having an edge solo, and blasters having the edge on teams.
[/ QUOTE ]
More pandering crap. Tell me, if you excel at soloing what's stopping you from excelling on teams? The real answer is nothing. Not a damn thing. Scrappers don't need a team. They can dish it out all out of proportion to their ability to take it, and they can take it damned well. This capacity in no way diminishes in a team setting. If anything, on teams Scrappers overshadow Blasters even more. This is a long-running problem, especially in the higher levels. Once again, this isn't my first rodeo. Your arguments are holding absolutely no water.
[ QUOTE ]
Now, can some scrappers do more than some blasters? Of course! Comparing a Dark Melee/Dark Armor to an energy/fire is just silly. How about we compare claws/inv to fire/ice instead
[/ QUOTE ]
No "Jack of all trades, master of none" should do anything better than a "Master". None.
[ QUOTE ]
As for defiance Vs critical hits... I'll trade any day. Criticals are an average of 8% of the time, and often come on a low damage attack. It's the lottery, whereas defiance is your tax rebate. If you win the lottery, you get a LOT of money! But, chances are against it. Your tax rebate sucks, but it's there.
[/ QUOTE ]
Defiance requires one to get their [censored] kicked in order to use it. Criticals do not. It's not even [censored]ing close. You want to b!tch about 8% of the time? If a Blaster has any damned sense in their head they'll use Defiance 0% of the time. By the time Defiance kicks in, a Blaster had better be getting healed, jamming greenies, or getting the hell out of Dodge. All of which negate the boost Defiance gives. The last thing they should be doing is firing off another shot. Unlike ATs with the ability to take a punch, when you're flashing red as a Blaster something's gone seriously wrong and you are about to die... in a hurry.
Once again, speaking from experiance, anyone who says Defiance is anything but a waste of effort that's best ignored, or better yet, would gladly trade Defiance for Criticals, is, to be blunt, talking out their [censored]es. Would Scrappers do better with Defiance than Blasters? Well of [censored]ing course. Scrappers can take a punch. Hell, the HP level at which Defiance kicks in is about the level a Regen has while running MoG. Yeah... that wouldn't be too overpowered.
[ QUOTE ]
Scrappers should in no way even come close to Blaster damage output.
[/ QUOTE ]
Here's the thing: on average, they don't. Can a scrapper keep it up for awhile? Yeah, of course. Can a blaster do twice the damage in a quarter the time? Yep.
Oh, and mez protection:
1) My regen actually gets mezzed pretty regularly.
2) Play on a team? 5/8 of defenders and 5/7 of controllers can give you mez protection.
The whole point is that although a solo scrapper>a solo defender, a blaster teamed with a controller, tanker, or defender can do more than a scrapper in that situation. Like you say, your huge damage ability comes at a price. Just try to make up for your weaknesses.
[ QUOTE ]
Blasters need their lackluster secondaries fixed.
[/ QUOTE ]
Devs...you've hung us out to dry on this. Why? Swapping out a couple powers in the secondaries that need help (fire, ice, dev) shouldnt take a YEAR.